Stimulating energy efficiency in households: Comparison of the Livinggreen.eu methods to theory

(1)

Stimulating energy efficiency in households -

Comparison of the Livinggreen.eu methods to theory

Daphne Geelen

Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Landbergstraat 15, 2628 CE Delft, The Netherlands

Abstract

In the Livinggreen.eu project a range of different methods were used by the involved organisations to inform and engage residents in taking sustainable renovation measures for their home as well as changing their behaviour. This article presents an inventory of the methods that address residential energy use and evaluates how the methods compare to theory about behavioural change, which for this article is described as a decision making process. Two complementary theoretical perspectives are taken, (1) the Innovation Decision Process, used in diffusion of innovations studies, and (2) models of behaviour based on motivation, ability and opportunity (MOA), rooted in social psychology. The inventory included 38 methods, which were categorized in 10 method formats, based on how the interaction with residents takes shape.

Concerning the Innovation-Decision Process, most of the methods address the first stages of the innovation adoption process, from becoming aware of the innovation to deciding to adopt an innovation, i.e. an energy technology or different energy behaviour. The actual

implementation and confirmation of the change – the last two stages of the process – are currently not addressed by the Livinggreen methods.

From the MOA perspective, the majority of methods tend to focus on increasing ability in terms of knowledge. Motivation is less explicitly addressed. Few methods focus on providing opportunities. Those who did are in the form of financial support.

Interaction between peers and the use of social norms, which in both theoretical

perspectives plays an important role in motivating behaviour change, is only present in few of the methods. These methods stimulate interaction between among residents and experts, and let people to work together on for example a renovation plan or new product concepts.

The comparison showed that the methods cover a limited part of the theory. Therefore recommendations are to review how the range of methods can be broadened based on lessons from previous research, to address all stages in the decision making process and make use of the mechanisms that can increase motivation, ability and opportunity. The activities of the Sustainability Centres may be restricted to their mandate and resources. It could then be useful to find out whether such a broader approach is desirable and possible within the city or region in which they operate by cooperation with other organisations.

(2)

1 Introduction

About a quarter of the primary energy consumption in Europe takes place in households (European Commission 2012). By the year 2030, this figure is expected to have risen significantly (Pérez-Lombard, Ortiz, and Pout 2008). The dwindling availability of fossil fuels however prompts for serious reductions in overall energy use. More efficient energy use in households is therefore prerequisite. With an annual replacement rate of 0,25 % or lower in e.g. The Netherlands, France and UK it would take hundreds of years to replace buildings (Thomsen and Van der Flier 2009). Renovation of the existing buildings is thus imperative to make the housing stock more energy efficient. This means that residents of buildings have to be stimulated to implement measures that optimize energy use in their homes.

Besides technical improvements such as wall insulation, efficient heating systems and photovoltaic solar systems, the behaviour of residents influences the energy use of a building. User behaviour is a significant determinant of the energy use of a building; see e.g. Van Raaij and Verhallen (1983) and Dietz et al. (2009). To consolidate the potential gains of energy saving or –producing buildings, it is imperative that consumer behaviour changes as well (Haas, Auer, and Biermayr 1998). Haas et al. state that there is a 15-30% rebound-effect, i.e., people act less consciously regarding energy use because they think the measures they took are sufficient. Technology, products and services to are available on the market. For these to have positive effects, residents thus need not only to be persuaded implement them, but also to adjust their behaviour for optimal results.

Figure 1 illustrates the relation between residents and the technologies they use. The interaction between residents and technology determines the energy use of the household. In order to change energy use of the household, residents would have to be persuaded to change their energy behaviour and/or to implement energy efficiency measures.

Figure 1: Relation between resident and technology in residential energy use.

The Livinggreen.eu project, co-financed by the EU Interreg 4B programme, aims to promote sustainable renovation. Firstly, sustainable renovations are demonstrated in a number of renovation projects of cultural heritage buildings. These buildings house ‘Sustainability Centres’ that promote sustainable renovation and lifestyles in their region. Secondly, methods are employed and developed during the project to stimulate adoption of sustainable technologies as well as behavioural changes.

This paper focuses on the methods of the Livinggreen.eu project. The goal of the paper is to gain insight in how the methods used by the Sustainability Centres compare to theory about stimulating behavioural change in order to do recommendations for future development of the

(3)

methods. The focus lies on the range of methods that address energy efficiency measures, as the area where most improvements can be made in terms of resource use.

Behavioural change in this paper is treated as a decision making about the adoption of a new product, service and/or activity (behaviour). In this case the Sustainability Centres aim to influence the decision making for adoption of energy efficiency measures.

2 Theoretical perspectives

2.1 Innovation-Decision process

The first perspective taken for evaluation of the methods is to see behavioural change as a process of decision-making. The Innovation-Decision Process (Rogers, 2003) describes such a process in several stages. The decision to adopt an innovation - a technology, product, service or behaviour that is new to the decision maker - is the result of a communication process in which a decision maker gathers information and communicates with other people in order to decrease the uncertainty whether an innovation will fulfil their need. Other scholars described a similar process, e.g. Prochaska, DiClemente and Norcross (1992) for health related behaviour, Dahlstrand and Biehl (1997) and Bamberg (2013) for pro-environmental behaviour.

The Innovation-Decision Process describes five stages, see also figure 2:

1. Knowledge stage: The decision maker learns about the existence of the innovation and gains knowledge or skills for effective adoption of the innovation.

2. Persuasion stage: A favourable or unfavourable attitude towards the innovation is formed. When the decision maker finds that adoption of the innovation is beneficial for his or her situation, he or she moves to the decision stage.

3. Decision stage: The decision to adopt or reject the innovation is made. Additional information is gathered to support this process, for example by trying out the innovation or talking to people who have already adopted the innovation. 4. Implementation stage: The innovation is put into use.

5. Confirmation stage: After some use, one may seek to reinforce the adoption-decision, by assessing whether it really is fulfilling the need of the adopter. Else it may be adjusted or ‘discontinued’.

The sequence of the stages is not necessarily linear. The persuasion stage sometimes comes before the knowledge stage or they run in parallel. The confirmation stage does not always occur (Rogers 2003). Furthermore people may go through several decision processes in parallel, with different durations, for other innovations. Knowledge and attitudes change by going through the process and decisions to adopt or reject an innovation affect future

decisions.

Figure 2: Innovation decision process (Rogers 2003)

Communication about the innovation decision plays an important role in the decision making process and takes place through several communication channels, from ‘mass media’ to interpersonal with experts and peer decision makers. Peer decision makers, what they do and think, whether they are in the decision-making process or already made the decision to adopt or reject, are important sources of information in the process. Social norms and modelling (behaviour of other people as an example) play a role here.

(4)

In order to influence the decision-making process, interventions can take place. Interventions are “any regulation, policy, program, measure, activity, or event that aims to influence behaviour” (Wilson and Dowlatabadi 2007, 170). In the innovation-decision process, change agents intervene through communication with potential adopters. Ideally, this

interaction takes place during the whole process and is tailored to the stage of the process (Rogers 2003).

The Sustainability Centres represent a change agency that, by means of the methods, interacts with the target group to speed up the innovation decision process. Their methods may be aimed for, or suitable for, different stages in a process an end-user goes through in deciding to adopt a certain technology-in-design/product/service or (different) behaviour.

2.2 Motivation, ability and opportunity to perform a behaviour

The second theoretical perspective for the evaluation of the Livinggreen methods uses models from social psychology that describe factors explaining when certain behaviour will occur. These models of behavioural change distinguish three factors: motivation, ability and opportunity (Ölander and Thøgersen 1995; Michie, van Stralen, and West 2011; e.g. Fogg 2009). Motivation refers to an individual’s motivation to perform certain behaviour. Ability refers to the capability of a person to perform the behaviour. This relates to knowledge, skill, as well as to the economic situation or the presence of certain technologies in the household (e.g. an energy monitor). Opportunity relates to situational circumstances that make it possible to perform a behaviour, such as the availability of different waste containers in the street to separate waste, the existence of a feed-in tariff for solar energy production at home or a discount for the purchase a certain product. Ability and opportunity are factors that mediate whether an intention to act is transformed in behaviour (Ölander and Thøgersen 1995).

The notion of ability and opportunity as mediators of behaviour has also been described as barriers (e.g. Gardner & Stern, 1996; Lorenzoni, Nicholson-Cole, & Whitmarsh, 2007;

McKenzie-Mohr, 2011). Reducing barriers then coincides with increasing ability or being provided an opportunity. A barrier can thus be lowered by changing a factor directly related to the decision maker (ability) and by changing the context (opportunity). McKenzie-Mohr (2011) relates motivation to the perceived benefits of certain behaviour, which can be rational (e.g. lower costs) or emotional (e.g. act in line with social norms).

Figure 3 depicts the relation between motivation, opportunity, ability and barriers. When barriers are sufficiently low and motivation sufficiently high, action will be taken, the behaviour occurs (upper right quadrant in the diagram). Based on perceived benefits and barriers a decision maker will be in one of the quadrants. Depending on that position, barriers have to be reduced, motivation increased or both, in order to move the decision maker to the upper right quadrant (McKenzie-Mohr & Schultz, 2012).

Figure 3: Relation between motivation and barriers for behaviour to occur. (Based on McKenzie-Mohr & Schultz, (2012) Keynote presentation at BECC 2012).

- Barriers -

High

High Low Low - Ability and Opportunities -

- Motivation -

- Percieved benefits -

Low

(5)

Concerning what intervention strategies to employ, literature suggests that a combination of strategies is more effective (Gardner and Stern 1996; Doug McKenzie-Mohr 2011; Osbaldiston and Schott 2012). There is not one way in which to develop and execute an intervention. This is very dependent on the context in which behavioural change is intended (e.g. S. C. Breukers et al. 2011). Although there are differences among scholars about the description of strategies and how to develop them, there is overlap between the strategies in that socio-technical context of the decision maker is to be taken into account. When possible, community based approaches are favoured, in addition to information, education and incentives (Breukers et al., 2011; Gardner & Stern, 1996; Heiskanen, Johnson, Robinson, Vadovics, & Saastamoinen, 2010; McKenzie-Mohr, 2011).

For the methods presented in the Livinggreen project, the question is in what way they influence motivation and barriers to the implementation of energy efficiency measures and changes in daily activities.

2.3 Linking the two perspectives

The two perspectives described above complement each other. The Innovation Decision Process describes how a person has to go through a process of decision making, the MOA perspective allows to describe a ‘status for behaviour’ at a point in the process and indicates ways to move that status to the desired behavioural change.

The innovation decision process leads up to a situation where the decision maker has sufficient motivation, ability and opportunity to make the decision to implement an innovation. At the first stages of the decision process, the decision maker is in one of the left or bottom quadrants in figure 3, where the behaviour does not occur. When by moving through the stages, motivation, ability and opportunities are sufficient, the decision maker will, in theory, adopt the innovation at the end of the decision stage, as illustrated in figure 4. Also during the implementation and confirmation stage, motivation, ability and opportunities need to sufficient for long-term results.

A change agency - a Sustainability Centre in this paper - can influence the process by interacting with the decision maker. Their interventions can be shaped based on the factors motivation, ability and opportunity, taking into account the ‘status for behaviour’ and stage of the process the decision maker is in.

An issue to be aware of is that we cannot directly match the knowledge and persuasion stage with respectively lowering barriers (increasing ability and opportunity) and increasing motivation, because both theories deal with these concepts differently. Further elaboration on how to combine the theories could provide an interesting lead to an adjusted behavioural model. That is however beyond the scope of this paper.

(6)

3 Research approach

As mentioned above, the objective of this article is to compare the methods used in the Livinggreen project to theory, in order to give recommendations for the methods of the Sustainability Centres in the future.

For the comparison with theory a selection of the methods was made out of the methods presented on the project website (www.livinggreen.eu). Methods that were selected (1) had households as a target group, (2) were addressing energy efficiency, (3) have been used as methods on their own (i.e. not only as part of another method) and (4) have been executed and (5) were sufficiently specified to analyse for the purpose of this paper.

Out of the 58 methods listed on the Livinggreen website, 38 were selected for analysis. An overview of the selected methods is given in appendix A.

The research questions for the analysis were:

1. What kind of methods to promote energy efficiency are represented in the Livinggreen projects?

a. What is the topic of the methods? Specifically focused on energy efficiency or addressed as part of renovation in general?

b. What are the goals of the methods? c. How does the communication take place? d. What formats of methods can be discerned?

2. What stages of the innovation-decision process are addressed by the methods? 3. What behavioural factors (motivation, ability, opportunity) do the methods address?

In what way do they do so?

To answer these questions the information in the method descriptions on the Livinggreen.eu website were used. A number of variables were defined based on the research questions. Each method was coded for this variable and based on these codes descriptive statistics could be generated. First an inventory of the selected methods was made based on topic, goals and forms of communication (research question 1). Subsequently the methods were related to one or more stages in the innovation decision process, based on their goal and form of

communication (research question 2). And finally, for each method was evaluated whether they are aiming to increase motivation, ability, opportunity or a combination of those (research question 3).

4 Results

4.1 Characterization of the methods

4.1.1 Topics, goals and main activities

The topic of the methods is for more than half of them renovation in general (22 out of 38). In these methods, energy aspects are thus interwoven with other aspects to renovation. Twelve methods specifically address energy use and four methods are adjusted for each occurrence, e.g. talks and technology guides. Of the latter, the majority of topics, according to the method description, are directly related to energy use.

The goals of the methods have been described in different terms for each method. The categorisation used on the website, relates to the goals of the methods and was therefore used to define the goals of each method. These are ‘create interest’, ‘inform’, ‘give advice’,

‘cooperation’, ‘network’ and ‘financial support’. Each method could be attributed to more than one category.

All of the categories were mentioned. Inform is mostly attributed (28), followed by give advice (23) and create interest (23).

In addition to the goals, for each method a main activity was defined. Main activity refers to what constitutes the method’s primary action of the participant. Four categories are discerned: receive information, dialogue, develop a skill and design. These categories represent

(7)

increasing levels of involvement of the participant. Receive information refers to receiving information about a topic, based on which a decision maker can take action. Examples are brochures, an exhibition or a thermographic map. Dialogue refers to an exchange of ideas, opinions and advice, such as takes place in personal advice about renovation measures. Dialogue can take place between two individuals as well as in a group setting. Develop a skill refers to training to gain know-how, for example on how to evaluate and work with the architectonic values of your house or how to select contractors for the construction work. Design refers to developing a plan or a design for renovation, products or services. In Livinggreen Labs people were for example engaged by designing new product and service concepts. For most methods the main activity was to receive information (26 out of 38), followed by dialogue (8), develop a skill (3) and finally to design (1).

4.1.2 Communication forms

In terms of communication, a division can be made between interpersonal communication and ‘mass media’. Interpersonal communication allows for two-way communication, providing the decision maker the opportunity to ask for clarification or secure additional information (Rogers 2003), while mass media refers to not-interpersonal, one-directional communication such as an information leaflet or a website.

The majority of methods concern some form of interpersonal communication (see table 1). For two methods cannot be stated whether they are interpersonal or not, these are two financial instruments in the method selection.

Table 1: Amount of methods using interpersonal communication.

Frequency

Interpersonal 21

Not interpersonal 15

Missing 2

Total 38

Another characteristic of a method is whether it is a group activity or an individual activity. Out of the 38 methods, 30 can be characterized as individual activities. From the eight methods that take place with a group, five make use of peer-to-peer interaction, to exchange ideas or work towards a goal, e.g. a concept design or renovation plan. For the other three, interaction is not explicitly part of the method, for example in a guided tour.

Table 2: Amount of methods aimed at individuals vs. aimed at a group.

Frequency Individual activity 29 Group activity 9

Total 38

Many of the methods are in some way tailored to the personal situation of a decision maker (19 out of 38). These include sessions with experts providing personal advice (e.g. EcoHouse Doctor), group activities in which each participant works on his/her own home (Renoteams and one of the Livinggreen Labs), maps where one can zoom into one’s home (thermography and geothermal resources), financial instruments and a website that guides you to insulation options based on your input about the home’s characteristics (Ecohouse Check).

The methods that do not directly address the personal situation of the decision makers (19 out of 38) are for example brochures, websites, movies, exhibitions, guided tours and events. These methods require the decision-makers themselves to take the step to apply the

(8)

4.1.3 Method format clusters

The methods were clustered in ten formats. These formats relate to the different ways in which the interventions take shape, based on the communication aspects described above. Table 3 lists the clusters and the amount of methods in the cluster. For comparison of the formats with the communication forms described in section 4.1.2, a cross tabulation is provided in table 4. For some of the formats there is only one method. Nevertheless the format of the intervention was considered sufficiently different from others to not combine it with one of the other formats. The formats will be used in the following sections for the comparison with theory.

Table 3: Division of methods over the method formats, with mention of methods in the category.

Format _Frequency

Public event

- EcoHouse family day/weekend - Ludwigsburg Energy Information Days

- The Neckarweihingen Energy and Environment Fair - Ludwigsburg

3 Exhibition

- EcoHouse - Demo on sustainable renovation

- Morden Hall - Interpretation panels for stable yard and waterwheel - Morden Hall - Permanent Livinggreen Exhibition

- The White Rose - Exhibition

4

Financial support

- Green loan 2% interest fee - EcoHouse

- Sustainable Housing Financial support - Habitat Durable

2 Guided visit

- Guided visit on sustainable renovation - EcoHouse - Hard Hat Tours - Morden Hall

- Open House Guided Visit – The White Rose

3 Information through ‘Mass media’

- Thermographic areal map - EcoHouse - Geothermal Map - Energetikom

- Guidebook energy-conscious building and refurbishing - Energetikom - Thermography - Habitat Durable

- Lille booklet : bien rénover son logement - Habitat Durable - Guidebook Morden Hall - Morden Hall

- Heritage and Green living Film - Morden Hall - Project Blog - Morden Hall

- Project Newsletters - Morden Hall

- Livinggreen Guides on technologies - Morden Hall - EcoHuis Check website - De Witte Roos

11

Information campaign

- Campaign on the thermo map: Energy tour - EcoHouse 1

Personaladvice

- EcoHousedoctor XXL – EcoHouse

- EcoHouse doctor (Ecological building practice) – EcoHouse - Energy Advisory Service – Energetikom

- On-site energy advisory service – Energetikom - ADIL partnership for personal advice - Habitat Durable - OPAH team - Habitat Durable

- Drop-in Sessions - Morden Hall - EcoHuis Fix – The White Rose

8

Talk

- Lectures about sustainable renovation - EcoHouse 1

Training

- Guidebook Morden Hall - Morden Hall

- Homeowner RenoTeam - Espace Environnement - RenoTeam Low Income - Espace Environnement

- Neighbourhood Committee RenoTeam - Espace Environnement

3

Workshop

- Taster Days - Morden Hall - Livinggreen Lab - TU Delft

2

(9)

Table 4: Cross tabulation of method characteristics with formats. Main activity Interpersonal communi-cation Group or individual activity Group interaction type Personalised approach Re ce iv e in fo rm a tio n Di sc u ss io n / Di a lo g u e Tr ai ni ng De si g n / De ve lo p No Ye s In d iv id u a l Gr o u p No n e Di sc u ss io n / Id e a s e xc h a n g e Co o p e ra tio n Ap p lie d t o per sonal s ituat ion To som e ex tent appl ied to per sonal s ituat ion No t a p p lie d t o per sonal s ituat ion Event 3 3 3 3 3 Exhibition 4 4 4 4 4 Financial support 2 2 2 2 Guided visit 3 3 3 3 3

Mass media information 11 11 11 11 4 7

Information campaign 1 1 1 1 1 Personal advice 8 8 8 8 8 Talk 1 1 1 1 1 Training 3 3 3 3 3 Workshop 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 Total 27 8 3 1 15 21 29 9 34 1 4 13 6 19 38 36 38 38 38 Missing - 2 - - -

4.2 The methods in relation to the Innovation-Decision Process

4.2.1 Stages of the Innovation-Decision process

The methods were attributed to the stages of the innovation decision process based on their goals and detailed description in the Livinggreen website. The following table shows to which of the stages of the innovation decision process the method formats relate. This mapping is based on the formats rather than the methods for clearer representation. The table shows the counts of each method for the stage it is focused on.

Table 5: Amount of methods attributed per process stage.

Format Knowledge Persuasion Decision Implementation Confirmation

Event (3 methods) 3 3 0 0 0

Exhibition (4 methods) 4 4 0 0 0

Financial support (2 methods) 0 0 2 0 0

Guided visit (3 methods) 3 3 0 0 0

Mass media information (11 methods) 11 10 6 0 0

Information campaign (1 method) 1 1 0 0 0

Personal advice (8 methods) 2 2 8 0 0

Talk (1 method) 1 1 0 0 0

Training (3 methods) 0 0 3 0 0

Workshop (2 methods) 1 1 0 0 0

(10)

The overview in the table shows that the knowledge, persuasion and decision stages are addressed by the methods. Often methods address more than one stage, for example the guided visits. The first two stages are best served. Examples of methods in the decision stage are the EcoHouse Doctor who advices a decision maker in making a renovation plan,

Renoteams where participants go in depth about how to organise and plan a renovation, and financial support. The methods do not address the implementation and confirmation stages or can only be used to some extent in these stages. In the innovation-decision process

information is needed in every stage and some of the available information, though mostly aimed at knowledge or persuasion, may serve also when one is deciding, taking measures or evaluating the implemented innovation.

Concerning the role of communication with change agents and peers in the decision process, section 4.1 already reported some results. The communication channels used by the Sustainability Centres were both interpersonal and through impersonal (mass) media. The majority of the methods make use of impersonal (mass) media offering knowledge. Peer-to-peer interaction is used in 5 of the 38 methods. These are the methods where the participants are stimulated to enter a dialogue and work on a design together. These are the three versions of the Renoteams, Livinggreen Labs and Taster Days.

4.3 Increasing motivation and lowering barriers

The previous section discussed the methods in relation the innovation-decision process. This section describes what factors of the MOA model are addressed. To promote behaviour, the methods should increase motivation or lower barriers as described in section 2.2. Based on the description on the Livinggreen website, each method was coded for which factor it aims to influence.

Table 6 indicates for each cluster what factors (motivation, ability, opportunity) the methods address. The methods are presented per format again.

Table 6: Amount of methods attributed per process factor.

Format Motivation Ability Opportunity

Event (3 methods) 3 3 0

Exhibition (4 methods) 4 4 0

Financial support (2 methods) 0 0 2

Guided visit (3 methods) 3 3 0

Mass media information (11 methods) 3 10 0

Information campaign (1 method) 1 1 0

Personal advice (8 methods) 8 8 0

Talk (1 method) 0 1 0

Training (3 methods) 3 3 0

Workshop (2 methods) 1 2 0

Total (38 methods) 26 35 2

The overview illustrates that the methods mostly address ability, particularly the methods in the ‘information format’. Regarding the other method formats, both ability and motivation tend to be addressed, although in with differences in emphasis. Two of the methods provide an opportunity, being the financial instruments. A nuance is in order here, as some of the methods, like the Energy Advisory Service (personal advice format) may refer people to such financial arrangements and thus indirectly provide for opportunities. They are not counted here as opportunities because the core of the method is not about the opportunity.

Concerning the intervention strategies related to this theoretical perspective it can be observed that information and educational instruments are broadly applied, with information as

(11)

well as demonstration with exhibitions and guided tours in the Sustainability Centres. In terms of incentives, financial incentives are provided in two methods.

The use of social norms and community-based approaches are few. As discussed in section 4.1, the majority of methods is targeting individuals and peer-to-peer interaction is part of just a few of the methods. A community-based approach can be recognised in the Renoteams and OPAH-teams methods.

5 Discussion

The reflection on the methods through a theoretical viewpoint enables a view on the Livinggreen methods in a broader context, as well to reflect upon possibilities for improvements. In the following, limitations of the research are addressed as well as

recommendations for the range of methods employed by the Sustainability Centres and future research.

The evaluation of the methods took place based on the information that the Livinggreen partners published on the project website as methods of knowledge transfer. The overview may thus not represent the complete range of methods employed by the project partners. However, since these are the methods the project suggests for other organisations that consider setting up a Sustainability Centre, it was decided to work with this list of methods for the evaluation.

In order to compare the methods they were coded for their characteristics. In this process, the main characteristics of the method were recorded; with the result that some elements of methods may not be visible in the analysis. There may for example be a few more methods that lead to financial support, other than the two reported in the analysis.

Another issue to keep in mind that is not directly clear from the paper, but can be read in the method descriptions, is that a Sustainability Centre often combines methods. For example the Ecohouse Doctor in Antwerp (personal advice) makes use of the exhibition in the Ecohouse to convey information; at Morden Hall Park the exhibition also provides the detailed (paper) guides on certain technologies (the Livinggreen Guides method).

There is little information about the effectiveness of the methods, i.e. the amount of

households implementing changes and the duration of behavioural changes. The evaluation in this paper is therefore limited to the comparison to theory. Furthermore, the analysis in this paper makes use of a small part of the described theories. For the aim of this paper, a first insight in the range of methods used in the Livinggreen project, this was sufficient. Further research would be required to gain more detailed insight and for a systematic evaluation of the effects of the methods on the adoption of energy efficiency measures and energy behaviour in the households.

Concerning the stages of the innovation decision process, it was observed that only the first three stages – knowledge, persuasion and decision – are targeted by the methods. Rogers (2003) described that a change agent’s activities should be tailored for each stage and a change agent ideally is involved in the whole process ensure successful adoption. Similarly, Bamberg (2013) suggests that interventions are to be tailored to each stage in a behavioural change process to reach the desired behavioural changes. This raises the question whether it would be possible to extend the reach of the methods to include all stages, in order to better realise implementation and continued use of energy efficiency measures and changes in daily household practice.

To address the implementation and confirmation stage additional methods would be required. The implementation stage of the adoption process will mainly be done with

contractors. What could be the role of a Sustainability Centre there? Maybe help in comparing offers, assistance in detailed decisions (which type of heat pump for example), or checks if installations are being installed right. The confirmation stage is very important in the context of energy renovation. Does the measure achieve what it was supposed to? Have the residents

(12)

adjusted their behaviours appropriately, or can that be improved. These are issues where a sustainability centre could provide a valuable service.

As discussed in section 2, interaction with peers and perceivable social norms have a strong influence on behaviour. Few of the methods make use of these mechanisms. It is therefore, recommended to explore if, and in what ways, social norms and peer-to-peer

interaction can be used in the range of methods of a sustainability centre. This is in line with the recommendations by McKenzie-Mohr (2011) and the MECHanisms toolkit, result of an

extensive research project about stimulating energy behavioural changes (Changing Behaviour 2010).

Comparison with the theory based on motivation ability and opportunity as factors

influencing the occurrence of certain behaviour showed that ability was addressed most by the methods. That ability is scoring highest is related to the higher amount of information in the form of booklets, guides etc. The other types of methods generally addressed both motivation and ability.

The high amount of knowledge related methods is not strange considering that decisions to implement energy efficiency measures are a high involvement decisions involving financial investment and planning the execution of construction works. People have high information need in order to make a decision. On the other hand, as pointed out above, there are other mechanisms that can be explored such as using commitments, social norms, visibility of adopted innovations. Increasing motivation, as for example McKenzie-Mohr (2011) points out, goes beyond factual information and also relates to social norms. It would be useful to review the methods employed in the Sustainability Centres as to how a broader approach can be achieved, and as such more effect may be reached. But do keep an eye on return on

investment (McKenzie-Mohr and Schultz 2012) or in other words, the amount of effort vs. effect (Osbaldiston and Schott 2012).

While in theory it is recommendable to broaden the range of methods to include all stages of the decision process and mechanisms for behavioural change, the Sustainability Centres may not have a lot of room to expand their intervention strategies. The activities of the Sustainability Centres can be restricted to their mandate and resources. This raises the question whether these centres should focus on what they can do and are already good at, or whether ways to broaden the range of methods are to be explored, for example in cooperation with other organisations that already are or could be involved in such activities.

Finally, it is recommended to regularly evaluate whether methods through which the Sustainability Centres interact with their target group are effective and sufficiently adapted to the contexts they operate in. This has been described as single and double loop learning respectively (Breukers et al. 2010). Sustainability Centres and their partners can and should take advantage of lessons from previous research and practical tools developed based on this research such as available with e.g. the Community Based Social Marketing approach

(McKenzie-Mohr, 2011 - accessible via www.cbsm.org) and the MECHanisms toolkit (Changing Behaviour, 2010 - accessable via mechanisms.energychange.info).

6 Conclusion

In this paper methods presented by the Livinggreen.eu project on their website were

evaluated with two theoretical perspectives on behavioural change. The evaluation showed that the range of methods that are employed cover a limited part of the theory.

In terms of the Innovation-Decision Process, only the first three stages are addressed. In terms of motivation, ability and opportunity, the range of methods is leans towards providing information to increase ability and motivation. Opportunities and motivation through other than rational information appear to not be addressed much.

Therefore it is recommended for the Sustainability Centres to review the range of methods making use of lessons from previous research to explore whether and in what ways it could be

(13)

useful to adjust or complement their current range of methods, where applicable in cooperation with other organisations.

Further research could involve the evaluation of the employed methods in more detail and with the aim to establish a range of methods for Sustainability Centres and their network partners, that covers all stages in the decision process and make use of the whole palette of tools and techniques identified in previous research. This may serve the Livinggreen

Sustainability Centres to increase the impact of their current methods, but can also contribute to the broader sector of organisations aiming to engage people to achieve energy efficiency the built environment.

7 References

Bamberg, Sebastian. 2013. “Changing Environmentally Harmful Behaviors: A Stage Model of Self-regulated Behavioral Change.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 34 (0): 151– 159.

Breukers, S C, E Heiskanen, B Brohmann, R M Mourik, and C F J Feenstra. 2011. “Connecting Research to Practice to Improve Energy Demand-side Management (DSM).” Energy 36 (4): 2176–2185.

Breukers, Sylvia, Julia Backhaus, Ruth Mourik, Mike Hodson, Simon Marvin, and Bettina Brohmann. 2010. “Practicing Learning and Learning in Practice: Testing Learning Tools for Energy Demand Side Management Projects.” In ERSCP-EMSU Conference. Changing Behaviour. 2010. Deliverable 14: Toolkit for Practitioners.

Dahlstrand, U, and A Biel. 1997. “Pro-environmental Habits: Propensity Levels in Behavioural Change .” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 27: 588–601.

Dietz, T, G T Gardner, J Gilligan, P C Stern, and M P Vandenbergh. 2009. “Household Actions Can Provide a Behavioral Wedge to Rapidly Reduce US Carbon Emissions.” Proceedings

of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106 (44): 18452–

18456.

European Commission. 2012. Energy, Transport and Environment Indicators. Publications Office of the European Union.

Fogg, B J. 2009. “A Behavior Model for Persuasive Design.” Persuasive’09. Claremont, California, USA.

Gardner, G T, and P C Stern. 1996. Environmental Problems and Human Behavior Boston, MA: Pearson Custom Publishing.

Haas, Reinhard, Hans Auer, and Peter Biermayr. 1998. “The Impact of Consumer Behavior on Residential Energy Demand for Space Heating.” Energy and Buildings 27 (2): 195–205. Heiskanen, Eva, Mikael Johnson, Simon Robinson, Edina Vadovics, and Mika Saastamoinen.

2010. “Low-carbon Communities as a Context for Individual Behavioural Change.” Energy

Policy 38 (12): 7586–7595.

Lorenzoni, Irene, Sophie Nicholson-Cole, and Lorraine Whitmarsh. 2007. “Barriers Perceived to Engaging with Climate Change Among the UK Public and Their Policy Implications.”

(14)

McKenzie-Mohr, D, and Wesley Schultz. 2012. “Choosing Effective Behavior Change Tools - Keynote Presentation.” In BECC 2012.

McKenzie-Mohr, Doug. 2011. Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community

Based Social Marketing. New Society Publishers.

Michie, Susan, Maartje van Stralen, and Robert West. 2011. “The Behaviour Change Wheel: A New Method for Characterising and Designing Behaviour Change Interventions.”

Implementation Science 6 (1): 42.

Ölander, F, and J Thøgersen. 1995. “Understanding of Consumer Behaviour as a Prerequisite for Environmental Protection.” Journal of Consumer Policy 18 (4): 345–385.

Osbaldiston, Richard, and John Paul Schott. 2012. “Environmental Sustainability and Behavioral Science: Meta-Analysis of Proenvironmental Behavior Experiments.”

Environment and Behavior 44 (2): 257–299.

Pérez-Lombard, Luis, José Ortiz, and Christine Pout. 2008. “A Review on Buildings Energy Consumption Information.” Energy and Buildings 40 (3): 394–398.

Prochaska, James O., Carlo C. DiClemente, and John C. Norcross. 1992. “In Search of How People Change Applications to Addicitive Behaviors.” American Psychologist 49 (9): 1102–1114.

Van Raaij, W F, and T M M Verhallen. 1983. “A Behavioral Model of Residential Energy Use.”

Journal of Economic Psychology 3 (1): 39–63.

Rogers, Everett M. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations. 5th edition. New York: Free Press.

Thomsen, André, and Kees van der Flier. 2009. “Replacement or Renovation of Dwellings: The Relevance of a More Sustainable Approach.” Building Research & Information 37 (5-6): 649–659.

Wilson, Charlie, and Hadi Dowlatabadi. 2007. “Models of Decision Making and Residential Energy Use.” Annual Review of Environment and Resources (32): 169–203.

(15)

Appendix A: Overview of methods

Name Description Sustainability Centre /

Partner

Method format Demo on sustainable

renovation Exhibition about sustainable renovation, based on three example families who renovated their home, focused on demonstrating technology. The exhibition also addresses sustainabilt living in broader sense (energy, water and materials use)

EcoHuis (Antwerpen) Exhibition

Guided visit on

sustainable renovation A guided visit along an exhibition about sustainable renovation and sustainable living

EcoHuis (Antwerpen) Guided visit

Ecological building practice

(EcoHouse doctor)

The EcoHouse doctor (an architect) gives free, independent technical advice to homeowners on their renovation ideas and plans. For their advice they make use of demonstration models of technologies.

EcoHuis (Antwerpen) Personal advice

EcoHouse doctor XXL An extended version of EcoHuis Dokter

with a team of advisors. An additional gain is exchange between professionals from different fields.

EcoHuis (Antwerpen) Personal advice

Thermographic areal map

Antwerp Information for a first assessment whether roofs are well insulated. The information is used as a tool in personal advice as well as connected to a campaign to stimulate thermal insulation.

EcoHuis (Antwerpen) Information ‘mass media’

Campaign on the thermo map: Energy tour

The thermographic map was used to stimulate thermal insulation. The campaign was set-up to make people aware of the information, to help them use/interpret the information and to give advice.

EcoHuis (Antwerpen) Information campaign

EcoHouse family day / weekend

Family oriented event, with fun activities related to sustainable living (pimp your bike e.g.) as well as in depth activities (lectures and workshops).

EcoHuis (Antwerpen) Event

Lectures about sustainable

renovation Lectures about a specific topic, providing independent information about sustainable renovation. Covering different subjects within this area.

EcoHuis (Antwerpen) Talk

Green loan 2% interest fee Low interest loans are available for residents taking energy measures.

EcoHuis (Antwerpen) Financial support

Energy Advisory Service Personal advice about energy and

construction by an interdisciplinary team (architects & engineers)

Energetikom (Ludwigsburg)

Personal advice

On-site energy advisory service

Personal advice about energy renovation on-site, by an interdisciplinary

team/consultant.

Personal advice

Geothermal Map Map of available geothermal heat for a

first assessment whether geothermal heat extraction is suitable for a certain plot. Applicable when considering using geothermal energy.

Information ‘mass media’

(16)

Guidebook energy-conscious building and refurbishing

Book with detailed information about energy-conscious building and refurbishing. Energetikom (Ludwigsburg) Information ‘mass media’ Ludwigsburg Energy Information Days

Information days for citizens with regard to energy use. There are lectures, discussions, exhibitions, excursions and site visits on several themes related to energy.

Event

The Neckarweihingen Energy and Environment Fair

A fair, organised every 2 years, relating to energy use and sustainable

renovation.

Event

Homeowner RenoTeam Training of minimum 4 meetings in which

residents/home owners are trained for renovation of their home, with the use of several tools. Espace Environnement (Charleroi) Training Neighbourhood Committee RenoTeam

Training of minimum 4 meetings in which residents/home owners are trained for renovation of their home, with the use of several tools. In a 'neighbourhood committee RenoTeam' the participants are from the same neighbourhood.

Espace Environnement (Charleroi)

Training

RenoTeam Low Income Training in which residents/home owners

are supported in developing renovation plans, though the use of several tools. The ‘RenoTeam Low Income’ is specifically tailored to low-income households.

Espace Environnement

(Charleroi) Training

ADIL partnership for

personal advice Personal advice about renovation measures, including technical advice and (support in) assessment of the home.

Habitat Durable (Lille) Personal advice

Lille booklet : bien rénover

son logement Booklet about renovation, with background information, examples and information 'how to go about it'.

Habitat Durable (Lille) Information ‘mass media’

OPAH team Team that operates in specific 'priority

streets' to stimulate, give advice and support for renovation.

Habitat Durable (Lille) Personal advice

Sustainable Housing

Financial helps Set of financial support measures for residents / home owners. Habitat Durable (Lille) Financial support Thermographic areal map

Lille Information for a first assessment whether roofs are well insulated. The information is used as a tool in personal advice as well as used in several activities as a means to communicate.

Habitat Durable (Lille) Information ‘mass media’

Drop-in Sessions Personal advice from a volunteer

organisation about measures for renovation, including technical advice.

Morden Hall (National Trust - London)

Personal advice

Guidebook Guidebook for the park and the buildings

on its premises. Includes information about the sustainably renovated building.

Heritage and Green living

Film Film about the heritage aspects of the location as well as how sustainable renovation and living has been implemented.

Morden Hall (National

(17)

Interpretation panels for stable yard and

waterwheel

Information at certain locations of a site explaining the background, how it works, what the benefit is of for example the energy systems.

Exhibition

Livinggreen Guides Brochures giving technical information

about several measures to minimise energy use and waste. Related to the technologies applied in the renovated demonstration building.

Morden Hall (National

Trust - London) Information ‘mass media’

Permanent ‘Livinggreen’ Exhibition Space

Exhibition about sustainable renovation in the demonstration building based on the applied technologies, as well as

exhibition with information for sustainable living.

Exhibition

Project Blog Information about the project progress

and activities at the building site on a weblog.

Project Newsletters Information about the project progress

and activities at the site via paper newsletters.

Taster Days Combination of a guided visit and a

workshop where participants can get informed about particular measures that are applied in the renovated

demonstration building. The workshops took place during the renovation process.

Workshop

Hard Hat Tours Guided visits to a renovation in progress,

in this case the demonstration building. The tours took place on a fixed day and time of the week.

Guided visit

EcoHuis Check Website with information about

techniques for sustainable renovation. Allows for a step-by-step exploration based on input by the website visitors.

De Witte Roos (Delft) Information ‘mass media’

EcoHuis Fix House visits by students. An inventory of

the home is made and advice given. A second visit is made to follow up on the advice, mainly to check what has been done.

De Witte Roos (Delft) Personal advice

Exhibition Exhibition about renovation measures

taken in the demonstration building. De Witte Roos (Delft) Exhibition

Open House - Guided visit Guided visits to a renovated

demonstration building.

De Witte Roos (Delft) Guided visit

Livinggreen Lab A workshop format, using a creative

process to explore solutions for

sustainable renovation and lifestyles. The format is adapted based on the theme and context in which it is executed.